My point being that these frameworks are chosen because the options are limited to what's available on the JVM, trading last-gen Java know-how against younger (and sexier) know-how.
It's also a miracle to me why JavaScript isn't more popular with Java developers, of all people, when in fact Java has two mature JavaScript engines, and JavaScript certainly is interesting from a bridge/migration perspective. Years ago Oracle and RedHat had even partial Node.js ports, but it never went very far.
I guess from the Java perspective, Javascript does not look too sexy, as it is a small but dangerous / unhelpful language with an uncompetitive-to-Java library ecosystem. TypeScript is great however.
React, Webpack, CSS compilers and pretty much all other modern frontend (compile-time) asset tools are running on Node.js and install from npmjs.com. Node.js is also perfect for a shallow web-facing container developed along with the front-end as a complement to Java-based (mini/SOA/whatever)-services. So I think it's quite useful to make Node.js workloads run under the JVM.
Not yet another packaging tool or fait-divers like pad left.
And the majority of them written in pure Java, not C++ wrapped in a JavaScript API.
I was specifically talking about web libraries/tools, though. Nobody is saying Java backend development must be abandoned in general.
Hint, you don't. Just hope that the browser does a good job with print to PDF, or run a server side pile of shell scripts, using LaTeX and Postscript, instead of a plain simple library.
And this is just one example from many, where JavaScript/Web sucks on the front-end.
Also Android is front-end development.